What are the G-Men doing at #2?

[Broncofan]

12 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Honestly, I'm really wondering if the Giants dropped the ball on this one or they were asking too much.  

I don’t blame them for holding out for a 2019 1st though with BUF.  If BUF made the 1.12 1.22 and 2019 1st and one 2018 2nd rounder and NYG turned it down yeah the Gmen might regret that.    If BUF wasn’t offering it’s hard to blame them.   Especially if they are hoping Darnold falls to them.   You can’t pass up that chance unless you are blown away.  

Quote

I'd be willing to bet that even if Cleveland takes the Giants' preference at QB, there would be at least one team whose willing to make a significant trade up the board.

Absolutely.  I think it depends more on how far down NYG is willing to move down.   Keeping Barkley or Chubb or even Nelson can be sold as leveraging the pick to still get the guy you wanted.   Moving to BUF 1.12 is a much harder sell esp if the guy ends up being good but not elite.   Or worse.  And that 1.2 pick yields a franchise QB.  

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

I don’t blame them for holding out for a 2019 1st though with BUF.  If BUF made the 1.12 1.22 and 2019 1st and one 2018 2nd rounder and they turned it down yeah they might regret that.    If BUF wasn’t offering it’s hard to blame them.   Especially if they are hoping Darnold falls to them.   You can’t pass up that chance unless you are blown away.

I think that goes without saying.  IF the offers were even remotely similar, you obviously take the Jets' offer.  But I'd imagine that the Bills are reluctant to trade 2 additional 1st round picks to move up.  I think that 3 firsts and a 2nd deal is what the Giants are looking for, but that offer isn't going to happen this far from the draft.

[CWood21]

3 minutes ago, Broncofan said:

Absolutely.  I think it depends more on how far down NYG is willing to move down.   Keeping Barkley or Chubb or even Nelson can be sold as leveraging the pick to still get the guy you wanted.   Moving to BUF 1.12 is a much harder sell esp if the guy ends up being good but not elite.   Or worse.  And that 1.2 pick yields a franchise QB.

Which is why the Giants need more value than what the Jets did.  The only way you turn away from a package is if the package is incredibly light or you think Chubb is an elite EDGE.

[Kip Smithers]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

IF you don't utilize that pick to extract as much value out of it, you've wasted your pick.  Nelson's positional value doesn't lend itself any favors to being picked that early, and Chubb better be one of the elite pass rushers in the NFL.  Either draft your franchise QB at 2 or sell of your pick for the most value.

Yes and No. First off, unless we can get an offer that we can’t refuse it’s not worth it to trade down put ourselves out of the running for the elite prospects that is Chubb, Nelson or Barkley. Secondly this notion that Guards don’t have positional value to go high is a myth. We just saw the contract Norwell got. On top of that, with the way defenses are attacking offensive lines nowadays guards value has never been higher. What I do agree on is that we can’t jusr stand pat at 2 and not try to get the best offer to move out of the spot if we aren’t going QB. But you have to find the balance of getting value in return and not going too far where you can get one of the top prospects.

[Kip Smithers]

1 hour ago, pigsooie5 said:

I have to ask then.... what exactly is your plan moving forward at the QB position? This very well could be Eli’s last competent year in the league and then he’s out and you’re in the same position next season, but with potentially no QB prospect the same caliber available. 

I’d be shocked if Dave didn’t draft a QB there. It’s extremely similar to me as the Bears situation last year. No one, and I mean literally less than 10% of the fan base wanted Trubisky at #3. Let alone #2. Go into our forum right now and find me one single person in there that would NOT take Trubisky at #2 now.

And we will see how Mitch turns out. If he doesn’t turn out to be at least a top 10 QB then you didn’t get the value in picking him. And you guys had Mike Glennon as your QB. We have Eli, BIG differencethere 

If Eli plays poorly and then next season we will likely give Davis Webb a shot. Yes he’s a third rounder but he has a lot of believers  and if he flops then we look for the future. In the mean time I’d rather build around the current QB and in turn helping whoever the next QB is.

[CWood21]

7 minutes ago, Kip Smithers said:

Yes and No. First off, unless we can get an offer that we can’t refuse it’s not worth it to trade down put ourselves out of the running for the elite prospects that is Chubb, Nelson or Barkley. Secondly this notion that Guards don’t have positional value to go high is a myth. We just saw the contract Norwell got. On top of that, with the way defenses are attacking offensive lines nowadays guards value has never been higher. What I do agree on is that we can’t jusr stand pat at 2 and not try to get the best offer to move out of the spot if we aren’t going QB. But you have to find the balance of getting value in return and not going too far where you can get one of the top prospects.

LIS, unless you think Chubb or Barkley is an elite prospect, you have to trade down if you get halfway decent value.  If you feel they're elite prospects, the value to move down has to be higher than what you're getting from that player.  Right now, Buffalo seems the most desperate to make a move up so you're best bet to move from that 2nd spot would be to find a deal with them.  What makes it worth moving from 2 to 12?  That remains to be seen.

As for the value of guards, we've had 19 guards drafted in the 1st round since 2000.  Of those 19, only TWO have gone in the first 10 picks.  And those two lasted their rookie contracts with their team at most before moving elsewhere.  If you don't think true G prospects are devalued, I'd say you're ignoring a ton of draft history.  You don't draft guards because you're using a premium draft pick on them, and when they turn out well you're paying them premium value as a FA.  Especially when it's shown you can get quality ones later in the draft. S ame for RB.

[Broncofan]

20 minutes ago, Kip Smithers said:

Yes and No. First off, unless we can get an offer that we can’t refuse it’s not worth it to trade down put ourselves out of the running for the elite prospects that is Chubb, Nelson or Barkley. Secondly this notion that Guards don’t have positional value to go high is a myth. We just saw the contract Norwell got. On top of that, with the way defenses are attacking offensive lines nowadays guards value has never been higher. What I do agree on is that we can’t jusr stand pat at 2 and not try to get the best offer to move out of the spot if we aren’t going QB. But you have to find the balance of getting value in return and not going too far where you can get one of the top prospects.

If you value both Nelson and Chubb equally though you’d be crazy not to trade down to 1.5 and get extra value.  You’d get either guy.   Trading to 1.12 may not make sense at all I get that.  

If you feel you HAVE to have Chubb or Nelson then you have to see if CLE moves off 1.4 in theory.  But I suspect that really only applies to Chubb.   But you get the idea.  

[pigsooie5]

2 hours ago, Kip Smithers said:

Yes and No. First off, unless we can get an offer that we can’t refuse it’s not worth it to trade down put ourselves out of the running for the elite prospects that is Chubb, Nelson or Barkley. Secondly this notion that Guards don’t have positional value to go high is a myth. We just saw the contract Norwell got. On top of that, with the way defenses are attacking offensive lines nowadays guards value has never been higher. What I do agree on is that we can’t jusr stand pat at 2 and not try to get the best offer to move out of the spot if we aren’t going QB. But you have to find the balance of getting value in return and not going too far where you can get one of the top prospects.

So your plan is to wait until 2020 to maybe get a franchise QB? 

[HTTRDynasty]

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

LIS, unless you think Chubb or Barkley is an elite prospect, you have to trade down if you get halfway decent value.  If you feel they're elite prospects, the value to move down has to be higher than what you're getting from that player.  Right now, Buffalo seems the most desperate to make a move up so you're best bet to move from that 2nd spot would be to find a deal with them.  What makes it worth moving from 2 to 12?  That remains to be seen.

As for the value of guards, we've had 19 guards drafted in the 1st round since 2000.  Of those 19, only TWO have gone in the first 10 picks.  And those two lasted their rookie contracts with their team at most before moving elsewhere.  If you don't think true G prospects are devalued, I'd say you're ignoring a ton of draft history.  You don't draft guards because you're using a premium draft pick on them, and when they turn out well you're paying them premium value as a FA.  Especially when it's shown you can get quality ones later in the draft. S ame for RB.

Brandon Scherff should count.  He was pretty much always destined to end up a G on our team.

[bananabucket]

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

LIS, unless you think Chubb or Barkley is an elite prospect, you have to trade down if you get halfway decent value.  If you feel they're elite prospects, the value to move down has to be higher than what you're getting from that player.  Right now, Buffalo seems the most desperate to make a move up so you're best bet to move from that 2nd spot would be to find a deal with them.  What makes it worth moving from 2 to 12?  That remains to be seen.

As for the value of guards, we've had 19 guards drafted in the 1st round since 2000.  Of those 19, only TWO have gone in the first 10 picks.  And those two lasted their rookie contracts with their team at most before moving elsewhere.  If you don't think true G prospects are devalued, I'd say you're ignoring a ton of draft history.  You don't draft guards because you're using a premium draft pick on them, and when they turn out well you're paying them premium value as a FA.  Especially when it's shown you can get quality ones later in the draft. S ame for RB.

 

You had me till the last three words.

[CWood21]

Just now, bananabucket said:

 

You had me till the last three words.

You disagree?

[bananabucket]

Just now, CWood21 said:

You disagree?

 

Well I assumed you were referring to Barkley, maybe you weren't.  I just think when you have such an elite prospect, you dont turn him down because you're praying you get a Kareem Hunt later on (which is incredibly unlikely anyway).  In my mind it's like passing on Adrian Peterson or Calvin Johnson because you can find "good" guys at the position later.

I'm not sure the same argument applies to an elite guard for the reasons you stated.  I think a RB is far more impactful.

[iknowcool]

Granted this is obviously a different situation than anything Gettleman dealt with in Carolina, but trading down is something he doesn't do.  I don't think he ever traded down in 4 years here and he would always talk about how he would rather get one great player than trade down for 3-4 picks.  If the Bills offered him a truckload, I'm sure he'd take it, but it also wouldn't surprise me if it is something they aren't considering doing. 

In 3 out of the 4 drafts here, we had only 5 picks.  Even in 2014, it was only 6.  Not sure how that compares to the rest of the league, but its gotta be low.  

[Kip Smithers]

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

LIS, unless you think Chubb or Barkley is an elite prospect, you have to trade down if you get halfway decent value.  If you feel they're elite prospects, the value to move down has to be higher than what you're getting from that player.  Right now, Buffalo seems the most desperate to make a move up so you're best bet to move from that 2nd spot would be to find a deal with them.  What makes it worth moving from 2 to 12?  That remains to be seen.

As for the value of guards, we've had 19 guards drafted in the 1st round since 2000.  Of those 19, only TWO have gone in the first 10 picks.  And those two lasted their rookie contracts with their team at most before moving elsewhere.  If you don't think true G prospects are devalued, I'd say you're ignoring a ton of draft history.  You don't draft guards because you're using a premium draft pick on them, and when they turn out well you're paying them premium value as a FA.  Especially when it's shown you can get quality ones later in the draft. S ame for RB.

That’s the point though, you don’t wanna trade down and miss out on the elite prospects in the draft. If you know the drop off is significant between the elite and the rest then you stand pat barring a trade that blows you away. So I somewhat agree with this thinking.

As for the Guards, Nelson is arguably the best player in the draft and is touted so much as a prospect. And the fact that there is precedent for Guards being taken in the top 10 is telling enough. Using history completely ignored the growing importance of the position itself, also the Giants just signed a good LT and to potentially pair him with Nelson solidified that left side for a long time. You can get Guards later and it should be considered but you have to approximate the gap between Nelson and others. 

[Kip Smithers]

2 hours ago, Broncofan said:

If you value both Nelson and Chubb equally though you’d be crazy not to trade down to 1.5 and get extra value.  You’d get either guy.   Trading to 1.12 may not make sense at all I get that.  

If you feel you HAVE to have Chubb or Nelson then you have to see if CLE moves off 1.4 in theory.  But I suspect that really only applies to Chubb.   But you get the idea.  

I agree that we should TRY to trade down a few spots. But I’m also happy to stay at 2 and pick Nelson or Chubb if we don’t feel the compensation is good enough